Content deleted Content added
Stevebroshar (talk | contribs) |
|||
| (13 intermediate revisions by 5 users not shown) | |||
Line 1:
{{WikiProject banner shell|class=Start|
{{WikiProject Computing |
}}
== Category ==
It still needs Category, See also, Bibliography.[[User:Connection|Connection]]
Line 14:
-- [[User:Mdd|Mdd]] ([[User talk:Mdd|talk]]) 23:56, 7 December 2012 (UTC)
:I oppose the merge. First, they are clearly different things. UML is an object modeling language. Object modeling is what you use UML for. Object modeling should talk about things like Booch, Jacobsen, etc. the process of modeling. You can do object modeling drawing boxes and arrows on a white board with no modeling language. Regarding your specific issues: 1) I don't see why object modeling language is confusing. It seems perfectly clear. As I said UML is an obvious example but there are other languages I've used. You could say OWL is a modeling language and Protege is a tool to do modeling. 2) I agree, this article as it stands now is awful, that is an issue with the article. 3) Again, no confusion UML is a modeling language object modeling is what you do with it. 4) Your last point wasn't substantive, no reply needed. BTW, I do agree that renaming this article is probably warranted. I was surprised there was no article for OO methods (booch, rumbaugh, etc.) If there was such an article I would say merging OO modeling into THAT article might make sense. [[User:MadScientistX11|MadScientistX11]] ([[User talk:MadScientistX11|talk]]) 16:19, 13 December 2013 (UTC)
:Good idea. Modeling is the more interesting thing. Modeling is what you do. The language is just one aspect of how you do it. People tend to put too much emphasis on 'language'. But the process is more important than the tools. And I don't think 'object-modeling language' is a notable term anyway. I think it's a WP invention. Merge [[object-modeling language]] into this article. [[User:Stevebroshar|Stevebroshar]] ([[User talk:Stevebroshar|talk]]) 13:29, 6 August 2025 (UTC)
== Programming and Modeling are not the same thing ==
Line 22 ⟶ 23:
I re-used some text I wrote for a related article: [[Object-Oriented Analysis and Design]] I think by the time I was done editing almost none of the original text was left, but I think it's a policy that you document when you do that so I am doing so. Obviously the two topics are highly related. [[User:MadScientistX11|MadScientistX11]] ([[User talk:MadScientistX11|talk]]) 17:43, 13 December 2013 (UTC)
:I just removed the OOM detail info from OOAD article and merged it into this article. I suspect that what I merged is the stuff you mention here. The content in the two articles was very similar yet rather different too. I think the info was copied (forked) and then modified over the years. IMO no point having duplicate info and OOM has its own article so we should include detail about it here rather than in some other article. OOAD now references OOM, but does dive into details about it. [[User:Stevebroshar|Stevebroshar]] ([[User talk:Stevebroshar|talk]]) 13:23, 6 August 2025 (UTC)
== Removed merge proposal ==
There was a proposal to merge the article object-modeling language into this one. It had been up for a year with no support and I disagreed with it for reasons documented so after revising the object modeling language article I decided to remove it. [[User:MadScientistX11|MadScientistX11]] ([[User talk:MadScientistX11|talk]]) 14:41, 19 December 2013 (UTC)
:I do think that object-modeling language should merged into this article (OOM). [[User:Stevebroshar|Stevebroshar]] ([[User talk:Stevebroshar|talk]]) 15:31, 6 August 2025 (UTC)
== Merge into OOAD proposal ==
Suggest merge this article into [[Object-oriented analysis and design#Object-oriented modeling]] for better organization and clarification. by [[User:Softzen|Softzen]] ([[User talk:Softzen|talk]]) 07:17, 30 December 2013 (UTC)
:No. Everything in this universe is related but we don't want to have just one WP article. We have to split stuff up. That's our job. OOM seems like a separate thing and it already has an article. Let's leave it that way. OOM is not OOAD, OOD, OOA or OOP. IMO, it should have its own article. [[User:Stevebroshar|Stevebroshar]] ([[User talk:Stevebroshar|talk]]) 13:26, 6 August 2025 (UTC)
{{clear}}
Do you agree? Please share your opinions. The reasons are:
*OOM and OOAD are tightly inter-connected. OOAD is done through OOM, and OOM activities can be elaborated into two stages or abstract levels: OOA and OOD.
*This article's description of OOM is currently incomplete and written with old waterfall thinking, not iterative.
::I oppose the merge. Object-Oriented modeling is not the same as OO Analysis and Design. OO Analysis and design are major phases in an OO Software development process. OO modeling is a technique you use in OO Analysis and Design. There is more to analysis and design than just modeling. For example, defining a budget for the overall project, developing a project plan for the next phase, etc. But more importantly it's possible to do object-oriented modeling for reasons other than analysis and design of a software system. You can do object-oriented modeling of the real world for purposes that have nothing to do with writing application software. For example, in the 80's I worked with a tool from Intellicorp called Simmkit. You would create OO models and then simulate them to better understand real world processes, e.g., the flow of parts on a factory floor. That was OO modeling but it had nothing to do with the analysis and design phase of a software lifecycle. There are also tools for process modeling that can be used for business re-engineering, to make a business process more efficient. Those also can be completely independent from efforts to write software. Your comments on the faults of this current article are irrelevant to the merge discussion. If there is something wrong with the articles, and I agree both need a lot of work, then that is an issue to fix the articles not to merge them. [[User:MadScientistX11|MadScientistX11]] ([[User talk:MadScientistX11|talk]]) 15:02, 30 December 2013 (UTC)
:::To add to what I said above if you do a search in Google with the following string: "object-oriented modelling business process redesign" you will see a lot of papers on how to do object-oriented modeling that is distinct from the analysis and design phases of a software development life cycle. [[User:MadScientistX11|MadScientistX11]] ([[User talk:MadScientistX11|talk]]) 16:00, 30 December 2013 (UTC)
::::Makes sense. I think OOM is a practice that can be used outside of OOAD ... even though it came from OOAD. OOM seems to have emerged as its own thing. [[User:Stevebroshar|Stevebroshar]] ([[User talk:Stevebroshar|talk]]) 15:30, 6 August 2025 (UTC)
== India Education Program course assignment ==
[[File:Wikipedia-Ambassador-Program-Logo.png|50px]] This article was the subject of an educational assignment supported by [[Wikipedia:Education program/Ambassadors|Wikipedia Ambassadors]] through the [[Wikipedia:India Education Program|India Education Program]].[[Category:India Education Program student projects|{{PAGENAME}}]] [[Category:India Education Program student projects]]
{{small|The above message was substituted from {{tlc|IEP assignment}} by [[User:PrimeBOT|PrimeBOT]] ([[User talk:PrimeBOT|talk]]) on 20:02, 1 February 2023 (UTC)}}
| |||